Facebook Manager

1) We move all BL Pokemon to UU.
2) We test the new metagame for 6 weeks.
2a) If it is obvious before the end of this period that 1 pokemon is extremely centralizing NEW UU, we remove it.
3) Decide which Pokemon are to be voted on for suspect at the end of the round.
4) Using the same voting criteria for the suspect tests, select voting.
5) Remove pokemon that have been voted on.
6) Repeat steps 3-6 for three weeks until metagame stabilizes.

Did I miss a step? Is there any reason you want to do this differently Aeouls?

Click to expand...

OK, I'm going to be refining these steps as we talk on IRC.

1) For the first step, we will begin the test. This involves an announcement in Stark and a news story on the front page, as well as Doug editing the ban list on shoddy to allow all NFEs, and Current BLs (with the exception of the Appliance Rotoms) in UU.

2) People play the new UU during this test. This test is tentatively scheduled to last 6 weeks. Players will try to meet the 1655/65 mark to vote

2a) In the event that during the first part (only the first part) of this test, there is a pokemon that is centralizing the new UU to the point that it is obviously broken, assuming their are any, then it will be remove as soon as possible.

3) Discuss the current metagame development in the Metagame Analysis Forum. People will discuss which Pokémon are the most problematic, and at the end of the current testing period, the most noted Pokémon will be taken into account.

4) At the end of each suspect period, we have a voting thread for each of the pokemon that have been deemed suspect in Suspect Test Vote (or maybe make a subforum for UU suspect only?).

5) Move the pokemon that were voted BL out of the UU tier. Continue doing steps 3-5 for 3-4 weeks until we reach a stage where either a) no pokemon are found to be suspect for voting or b)every pokemon is voted to be UU

Code:

[3:28pm] RB-Golembat: hey havak
[3:28pm] RB-Golembat: so who here is ready to talk about refining the UU plan
[3:29pm] Havak: Fine by me
[3:32pm] RB-Golembat: anyone else?
[3:32pm] TAY: i'm up for it
[3:33pm] RB-Golembat: the closest we have to a process is this
[3:33pm] RB-Golembat: http://www.smogon.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1611908&postcount=103
[3:33pm] RB-Golembat: but i would like to flesh it out
[3:33pm] RB-Golembat: and try to find posible problems with it
[3:34pm] sleepypluff left the chat room. (Ping timeout)
[3:41pm] RB-Golembat: hello?
[3:41pm] Venom: man
[3:41pm] Venom: umbasarc is working my nerves
[3:42pm] Bass: how so?
[3:48pm] RB-Golembat: anyone?
[3:50pm] Venom: brazilian on smog uni
[3:51pm] Venom: subwayeverton: whom whether to fight incompatible encoding
[3:51pm] Venom: subwayeverton: whom whether to fight incompatible encoding
[3:51pm] RB-Golembat: chil
[3:53pm] TAY: i think we need to be more specific about: 3) Decide which Pokemon are to be voted on for suspect at the end of the round.
[3:53pm] TAY: who is deciding, and how
[3:54pm] RB-Golembat: hmmm
[3:54pm] RB-Golembat: well, dougs stats can lend a bit towards helping
[3:54pm] RB-Golembat: but i dont want to rely just on that
[3:54pm] TAY: yeah...
[3:54pm] TAY: the stats by themselves are hard to interpret
[3:54pm] TAY: honestly i would weigh anecdotal evidence a lot more heavily
[3:55pm] RB-Golembat: well, there can be two sets of times to meet voting requirements
[3:55pm] TAY: i guess...
[3:55pm] RB-Golembat: 1 to particpate in the discussion
[3:55pm] RB-Golembat: 1 to particapate in the vote
[3:55pm] TAY: but that almost ensures that everything nominated will be banned
[3:55pm] TAY: since no one wll nominate it unless they think it is overpowered...
[3:56pm] TAY: well that's probably too black and white of a description, but it could wind up that way
[3:56pm] RB-Golembat: yeah, i see what you're saying
[3:57pm] TAY: still, the only other option i can see is that we have a selected panel nominate suspects, and then have qualified members vote on them
[3:57pm] TAY: which honestly i would support but it looks bad from a PR perspective
[3:57pm] RB-Golembat: well, the other alternative is bold voting
[3:57pm] RB-Golembat: and we all know how well that has worked
[3:58pm] TAY: hey i liked the bold voting >_>
[3:58pm] TAY: but i guess im the only one lol
[4:00pm] RB-Golembat: well, the hardest part is to find the suspects of the new uu
[4:00pm] RB-Golembat: if we could figure out a reliable way to do that, we would be ready to go
[4:01pm] TAY: well, i would amend that to "OBJECTIVELY find the suspects of UU"
[4:01pm] Venom: well
[4:01pm] Venom: there are some pokemon that are obv too strong for uu
[4:01pm] TAY: really i say let's just pick a metho dand if it doesn't work well we're all the wiser next time
[4:01pm] Venom: that are clear
[4:02pm] TAY: we've been putting this off for way too long lol
[4:02pm] TAY: and if any major problem jumps up, it isn't like we're retarded enough to say "NO STICK WITH THE PROCESS"
[4:02pm] TAY: let's juts fucking do it lol
[4:02pm] RB-Golembat: just like in the garchomp test
[4:03pm] RB-Golembat: how deoxy-s was added as suspect in the middle
[4:03pm] TAY: that was a horrible choice
[4:03pm] Venom: it wa smostly colin influence
[4:03pm] Venom: iirc
[4:03pm] TAY: well we shouldn't have done it regardless
[4:03pm] Venom: true that
[4:03pm] Venom: but then again
[4:03pm] Venom: the official server was the only battling server
[4:04pm] TAY: yeah...
[4:04pm] Venom: for all of pokemon players
[4:04pm] Venom: for the most part
[4:04pm] Havak: Anyway, RBG, I'm pretty much fine with the current "process"..
[4:04pm] TAY: even then, we shouldnt have voted on only garchomp
[4:04pm] Havak: It just depends if everyone else can agree on it
[4:04pm] RB-Golembat: havak, we just need to find problems
[4:04pm] RB-Golembat: and the "identifying pokemon to vote on"
[4:04pm] TAY: well i still think we need to figure how we're doing step 3
[4:05pm] Havak: Well, all we need is a discussion thread I think.. I'd prefer it to be in PR, but I guess Metagame Analysis could be useful enough
[4:05pm] TAY: and then we just sort of come to a general consensus?
[4:05pm] Havak: People will nominate suspects, and we'll discuss the Pokémon brought up the most I guess incompatible encoding
[4:06pm] TAY: i guess that's how we chose all the previous suspects lol
[4:06pm] TAY: ok i support that
[4:06pm] TAY: does anyone see a problem with havak's suggestion?
[4:06pm] Havak: The only problem is that BL is so huge, it can't really work the same way as testing Uber Suspects in OU lol
[4:07pm] TAY: yeah
[4:07pm] Havak: So taking 1 at a time is silly obviously
[4:07pm] TAY: one at a time is hardly an option
[4:07pm] Havak: This is the only way to reduce BL
[4:07pm] Havak: And at a later date
[4:07pm] Havak: If we have second thoughts
[4:07pm] RB-Golembat: makes sense
[4:07pm] Havak: We can do the one at a time process
[4:07pm] Havak: By dropping things back in
[4:08pm] RB-Golembat: honestly, i would not be opposed to having a thread in stark
[4:08pm] • RB-Golembat provided it is HEAVILY moderated
[4:08pm] Venom: ^^^
[4:08pm] TAY: isnt that the same as a PR thread lol
[4:08pm] Havak: I'm not sure about that
[4:08pm] Havak: Though if we have a vote in IS, and people agree to it in Stark then so be it lol
[4:08pm] RB-Golembat: honestly, it is foolish to expect that someone in stark isnt going to make a thread to disucss the new uu
[4:09pm] RB-Golembat: id rather a trusted badge member start it
[4:09pm] Havak: Well, IMO
[4:09pm] Havak: If they do start a thread
[4:09pm] Havak: We can look at that
[4:09pm] RB-Golembat: then some random person i have no about
[4:09pm] Havak: and possibly "promote" people from that discussion if we think they'll add to it
[4:09pm] Havak: So they can discuss it with us, I dunno
[4:09pm] Havak: I just hate threads getting really clogged with none sense
[4:10pm] RB-Golembat: yeah
[4:10pm] Havak: I don't think mods will want to delete about 80% of the content continually
[4:10pm] RB-Golembat: yeah
[4:11pm] RB-Golembat: well, it cant really be in PR
[4:11pm] RB-Golembat: since chaos and misty said that is going to die soon
[4:11pm] TAY: yeah...
[4:11pm] Havak: But if that's what the majority of Badgeholders+ want
[4:11pm] Havak: Then I'll go with it
[4:12pm] TAY: well the stark thread will likely exist no matter how we construct the process...
[4:12pm] TAY: so im not sure it's worth putting a lot of thought into
[4:12pm] Havak: Yeh, but whether we take any notice of it is another matter lol
[4:12pm] Havak: There's bound to be plenty of good discussion there obviously
[4:13pm] Havak: But I dunno, I just get the feeling it'll turn to shit lol
[4:13pm] Havak: Brb
[4:13pm] RB-Golembat: well, we can't say "don't make a thread dicussing the UU test"
[4:13pm] Venom: does anyone else think LO on CM Golduck is an ok option
[4:13pm] RB-Golembat: unless people discus it in the announcement thread
[4:14pm] TAY: yeah the announcement thread works
[4:14pm] TAY: like "post your experiences here"
[4:14pm] TAY: that seemed to go not-terribly for deoe and shaymin
[4:15pm] • RB-Golembat agreed
[4:15pm] TAY: certainly better than the wobb and chomp threads though lol
[4:15pm] RB-Golembat: ok, im updating my post right no
[4:16pm] RB-Golembat: ok, here is a suggestion
[4:17pm] RB-Golembat: in the current suspect vote, people can vote and there votes, in theory, can not be questionedright?
[4:17pm] TAY: yeah
[4:18pm] RB-Golembat: so what if, instead of voting by poll, we have people name the pokemon they think should be moved to BL with just a small bit of reasoning
[4:18pm] RB-Golembat: cause frankly, just listing the pokemon to move to BL wont be ebough
[4:18pm] TAY: that's just like the bold voting...
[4:19pm] TAY: ugh
[4:19pm] RB-Golembat: well, not the way im seeing it
[4:19pm] TAY: explain...
[4:19pm] RB-Golembat: how to explain it.....
[4:19pm] TAY: lol
[4:19pm] Havak: Lol
[4:19pm] Havak: I think I get it
[4:19pm] RB-Golembat: help me then
[4:19pm] Havak: But it is similar to Bold Voting still lol
[4:20pm] TAY: well how is it different than just having a discussion thread and then a no-questions-asked vote?
[4:20pm] Havak: This is why I want to leave it to BadgeHolders+ for now
[4:21pm] TAY: so it will be in IS?
[4:21pm] Havak: There can be a discussion thread in Stark, but for the most party, it's meaningless
[4:21pm] TAY: I think the discussion should be public...
[4:21pm] RB-Golembat: hmmm
[4:21pm] TAY: why are we axing PR >_>
[4:21pm] Havak: If we can keep PR, then PR
[4:21pm] Havak: If not
[4:21pm] Havak: Metagame Analysis is the place
[4:21pm] Havak: Because that is BadgeHolders+ currently
[4:21pm] TAY: that isnt public
[4:21pm] RB-Golembat: yeah, that seems like a good place
[4:21pm] RB-Golembat: its just not well known about
[4:21pm] Havak: It is public isn't it?
[4:21pm] TAY: MA? no
[4:22pm] RB-Golembat: yeah
[4:22pm] TAY: at least i didnt think so...
[4:22pm] Havak: It's only recently been BadgeHolders+
[4:22pm] RB-Golembat: anyone can see it
[4:22pm] Havak: To post
[4:22pm] TAY: oh
[4:22pm] Havak: Everyone can view
[4:22pm] Venom: anyone can see MA
[4:22pm] TAY: hmmm
[4:22pm] Havak: I couldn't even post there until recently
[4:22pm] Venom: and PR
[4:22pm] RB-Golembat: same here havak
[4:22pm] TAY: well a lot of people dont know about it
[4:22pm] Havak: It was changed
[4:22pm] Havak: Well
[4:22pm] TAY: we should make it a bit more obvious to average users
[4:22pm] Havak: There will obviously be News Article
[4:22pm] Havak: and Stark thread / announcemant on the forums
[4:22pm] RB-Golembat: i think, that a link metagame analysis should be included
[4:22pm] Havak: Yes
[4:22pm] Havak: That's what i mean
[4:22pm] TAY: well if most people are like me, the go straight to the forums
[4:23pm] RB-Golembat: i would like to see MA a subforum of Stark
[4:23pm] Havak: Enough people will see the news
[4:23pm] Havak: and a thread will be in Stark
[4:23pm] Havak: and an announcement in the forums too..
[4:23pm] TAY: ok with a stark thread that will be transparent enough
[4:23pm] Havak: It won't got un-noticed
[4:23pm] TAY: OK ^__^
[4:24pm] RB-Golembat: it will need a link to MA in the pos
[4:25pm] TAY: ok so I think we have a method down for step 3...
[4:25pm] TAY: am i correct in assuming we will adopt havak's suggestion from before?
[4:25pm] RB-Golembat: which one?
[4:26pm] Havak: So, for step 3, it's "Discuss the current metagame development in the Metagame Analysis Forum. People will discuss which Pokémon are the most problematic, and at the end of the current testing period, the most noted Pokémon will be taken into account." incompatible encoding
[4:26pm] Havak: Or something along those lines..
[4:27pm] • RB-Golembat added
[4:28pm] Havak: It should be obvious if nearly every members comes out with "Shaymin has to be considered BL" etc
[4:28pm] TAY: and when you write "5) Remove pokemon that have been voted on." im assuming you still intend to keep the pokemon which are not deemed overpowered...
[4:28pm] RB-Golembat: yeah, thats what i mean
[4:29pm] RB-Golembat: actually, what do you all think of 2a?
[4:29pm] RB-Golembat: is it really neccesary?
[4:29pm] TAY: yes
[4:29pm] TAY: it is vital
[4:30pm] RB-Golembat: how do we determine that though?
[4:30pm] Havak: I actually don't think it's needed
[4:30pm] TAY: well it should be obvious
[4:30pm] RB-Golembat: i think that we should have it, but will not need it
[4:31pm] TAY: like, if we were suspect testing rayquaza in OU, we wouldnt need 6 weeks to determine it's status, and after a little while the ladder would get pointless and frustrating, and people would lose interest
[4:32pm] TAY: that step is just in case something really obvious comes along
[4:32pm] Havak: Hmm, I guess
[4:32pm] TAY: it might not
[4:32pm] TAY: but it would be nice to have that to fall back on
[4:32pm] TAY: without amending the process mid-way
[4:32pm] RB-Golembat: yeah, that would not look good
[4:32pm] Havak: The the argument to counter that though could be something like
[4:33pm] Aeolus joined the chat room.
[4:33pm] Aeolus was promoted to operator by ChanServ.
[4:33pm] Havak: We'll get more stats and information to back up any future queiries about said Pokémon if we just allow it for the remainder of the testing period incompatible encoding
[4:33pm] Aeolus: what are you talking about
[4:33pm] Havak: But yeh, I'm not really fussed on that, I guess it's another majority decision
[4:34pm] Havak: New UU, the process
[4:34pm] Havak: Finalizing it
[4:34pm] Havak: Hopefully, anyway
[4:34pm] Aeolus: is the process still to drop every BL into the game?
[4:34pm] TAY: well if the pokemon is really as broken as i suggested, it's pretty unlikely that it would be up for a UU suspct test in which those stats would be relevant
[4:34pm] Havak: Yes
[4:34pm] Aeolus: do we realize that is just going to result in a renaming of tiers?
[4:34pm] Aeolus: BL -> UU
[4:34pm] Aeolus: UU -> NU
[4:35pm] TAY: BL will still exist...
[4:35pm] TAY: it will just likely get smaller
[4:35pm] Havak: Yeh
[4:35pm] Aeolus: ok
[4:35pm] Aeolus: I don't care about UU much
[4:35pm] Aeolus: so I'm not going to fuss about it
[4:35pm] Aeolus: I just don't think it is a good process
[4:35pm] Havak: Heh
[4:35pm] RB-Golembat: well, we are trying to iron it our right now
[4:36pm] Havak: Well to be honest
[4:36pm] Havak: The majority of BLs are, IMO, very close in terms of "power"
[4:36pm] Havak: So it's a lot more difficult to just say what we'll get rid of without testing
[4:36pm] • RB-Golembat agreed
[4:36pm] Havak: than it would be with Ubers and OU
[4:37pm] Havak: Which is the only reason I'm up for dropping all BLs in
[4:38pm] TAY-hime joined the chat room.
[4:38pm] Havak: While there are a few Pokémon I'd expect to do better than others, I can't really just go out on a limb and say what we should put in UU and what we shouldn't incompatible encoding
[4:38pm] TAY-hime left the chat room.
[4:41pm] TAY left the chat room. (Ping timeout)
[4:41pm] TAY joined the chat room.
[4:41pm] TAY was granted voice by ChanServ.
[4:41pm] RB-Golembat: welcome back tay
[4:41pm] TAY: stupid random internet shutdown
[4:42pm] Havak: Right so, every "suspect" we fish out from the discussion thread, will have their own "BL/UU" voting thread for step 4
[4:42pm] Havak: And anything voted BL will be removed for step 5
[4:42pm] TAY: what >_>
[4:43pm] Havak: And then we repeat?
[4:43pm] TAY: that will take forever
[4:43pm] Havak: It'll all be done at the same time first of all
[4:43pm] Havak: We could end up with 15 suspects from Round 1 of testing
[4:43pm] Havak: And have to vote of them all at once..
[4:43pm] TAY: ok..
[4:44pm] Hipmonlee joined the chat room.
[4:44pm] Hipmonlee was granted voice by ChanServ.
[4:44pm] Havak: But each Pokémon would need its own thread incompatible encoding
[4:44pm] Havak: For the yes/no vote thing
[4:44pm] RB-Golembat: yeah
[4:45pm] Havak: So that's basically it, the finalized process, it just needs a majority agreement / Admin approval to start, as well as Doug changing the ban list
[4:45pm] RB-Golembat: yeah
[4:45pm] Havak: So that's pretty much job done as far as I can see
[4:45pm] RB-Golembat: well
[4:45pm] RB-Golembat: the majority of RB, TAY and Havak
[4:45pm] RB-Golembat: i wouldnt call that a majority?
[4:45pm] TAY: yeah!
[4:45pm] TAY: best majority!
[4:46pm] Havak: Well if people have anything to say, they can comment on it
[4:46pm] TAY: hey what ever happened with the Arceus thing?
[4:46pm] Havak: You just need to post that because that is for now the final process

Last thing we need to decide on, should the tests after the first part be three or four weeks?

We need to implement an "after two or three weeks into the first test we remove things that stand out as obviously broken in the tier, assuming there are any" phaze. We seem to be going in completely the opposite direction even though nobody seemed to comment negatively on jabba and my arguments for it.

I really think that this kind of a failsafe between steps 1 and 2 is necessary to flesh out beforehand and just helps to cover our ass so that 1) things that are broken don't ruin the entire 6-week test and 2) If not many people participate, we can keep things fresh. 6 weeks is a really long time, especially if something broken is discovered very quickly.

I don't know how anybody can argue that there will be things that don't break UU that will stand out immediately, the fact that those things exist is the entire reason the BL tier was created to begin with. RBG that sketch looks good, but I think you need to add in the initial check.

[4:29pm] RB-Golembat: actually, what do you all think of 2a?
[4:29pm] RB-Golembat: is it really neccesary?
[4:29pm] TAY: yes
[4:29pm] TAY: it is vital
[4:30pm] RB-Golembat: how do we determine that though?
[4:30pm] Havak: I actually don't think it's needed
[4:30pm] TAY: well it should be obvious
[4:30pm] RB-Golembat: i think that we should have it, but will not need it
[4:31pm] TAY: like, if we were suspect testing rayquaza in OU, we wouldnt need 6 weeks to determine it's status, and after a little while the ladder would get pointless and frustrating, and people would lose interest
[4:32pm] TAY: that step is just in case something really obvious comes along
[4:32pm] Havak: Hmm, I guess
[4:32pm] TAY: it might not
[4:32pm] TAY: but it would be nice to have that to fall back on
[4:32pm] TAY: without amending the process mid-way
[4:32pm] RB-Golembat: yeah, that would not look good
[4:32pm] Havak: The the argument to counter that though could be something like
[4:33pm] Aeolus joined the chat room.
[4:33pm] Aeolus was promoted to operator by ChanServ.
[4:33pm] Havak: We'll get more stats and information to back up any future queiries about said Pokémon if we just allow it for the remainder of the testing period incompatible encoding

Is what you are suggesting any different from step 2a in RB Golbat's process? The intent is definitely the same, but maybe it should be worded better?

EDIT: Oh the stuff outside the quote is just clarification of stuff inside the quote, i think >_< but yeah it probably could have been made a little more clear.

Well, it just wasn't in RB's "newest" proposal, I just wanted to make sure it got into the final draft. It was in the post RB quoted, but not included in his actual post. I saw that, I was just making sure it didn't get lost in the process.

If I'm understanding correctly, though, it seems that there is a step missing between 3 and 4 where "problematic pokemon" are prioritized based on some criteria and then tested in isolation before the voting takes place.

Facebook Manager

Well, the way I am predicting it, BL will end up with 25 to 40 pokemon. Which would take lots of time to test. Although I can see your problem. We need a way to identify AT THE BEGINNING OF EACH THE TEST what people should be looking for as suspect, rather then at the end test period having to look back and formulate an opinion in an instant, rather then focusing the three weeks on playtesting the list of suspects we will have each round. Does anyone have any suggestions for ways around this? Because frankly, I think this test will work a lot better if people know the suspects at the beginning of the three week period rather than in the middle/end

Edit: OK, here is how i see it to be possible

During the 6 week test, we choose the suspects within weeks 2-3

We extend the 3 week test to 4 weeks, and decide the suspects during week 2.

Seems alright. As long as this process isn't rushed (which it isn't to me), I support what has been said.

This should be posted in the Policy Review soon though. Or the Metagame Analysis. Whichever forum is being kept. We should find people ahead of time that will help the community test this (other than the devoted UU players).

Facebook Manager

1) For the first step, we will begin the test. This involves an announcement in Stark and a news story on the front page, as well as Doug editing the ban list on shoddy to allow all NFEs, and Current BLs (with the exception of the Appliance Rotoms) in UU.

2) People play the new UU during this test. This test is tentatively scheduled to last 6 weeks. Players will try to meet the 1655/65 mark to vote

2a) In the event that during the first part (only the first part) of this test, there is a pokemon that is centralizing the new UU to the point that it is obviously broken, assuming their are any, then it will be remove as soon as possible.

3) Discuss the current metagame development in the Metagame Analysis Forum. People will discuss which Pokémon are the most problematic, and at the end of the current testing period, the most noted Pokémon will be taken into account.

4) At the end of each suspect period, we have a voting thread for each of the pokemon that have been deemed suspect in Suspect Test Vote (or maybe make a subforum for UU suspect only?).

5) Move the pokemon that were voted BL out of the UU tier. Continue doing steps 3-5 for 3-4 weeks until we reach a stage where either a) no pokemon are found to be suspect for voting or b)every pokemon is voted to be UU

We extend the 3 week test to 4 weeks, and decide the suspects during week 2.

Click to expand...

EDIT: In response to Aeolus, I think that could be managed at the end of these above tests, by going through the Pokemon promoted to BL in the last 2-3 group votes, and testing them like we are currently doing the OU suspect test.

Is there anything missing between these two parts of the test? I Really want to get this started soon, so feedback is needed.

Facebook Manager

Also, there is a reason this needs to be started as soon as possible. If the first part of the test is 6 weeks, if you add all the time it takes to verify voters and have the actual votes take place, then the January OU list will be out before we do the first round of voting, which could very well be a problem.

Or rather, we wait until we get the January tier list and start the process then. But I would rather it start now than later.

I'm throwing out RB-Golbat for this role then. He's been the most excited about it and he'll do a good job. I'd love to lead it myself but I think he's taken a more pro-active interest then I have but I'd love to help him out.

I'm throwing out RB-Golbat for this role then. He's been the most excited about it and he'll do a good job. I'd love to lead it myself but I think he's taken a more pro-active interest then I have but I'd love to help him out.

Click to expand...

I'd support both of you, but yeah, RBG has been so enthusiastic about this, and done so much to get it going. There's not a day I go by without seeing him talk about it haha

RBG seems the most fit for this role. If he needs help, there's always one of us. I feel confident though that he will make the right decisions with this project, so I'm throwing my support for him. And Caelum will obtain my second support for obtaining leader or (if RBG accepts) a co-leader.

RB should probably lead this, seeing as he has been actively involved in it so far, as well as the fact Obi doesn't want to lead this. He can always ask for help to many people here if he needs it. If he doesn't want to, Havak or Caelum would be good options.

Yeh, RB should lead this since he's the one who's started it all. But if he's not up for making all the threads and whatnot, I'll do it, or at least help him with everything. (Though I will be slightly less active for the next week and a half).

Facebook Manager

However, I think because this test has taken so long to start, we might run into a problem. The January OU list will be out before the first part of this test is over, so some pokemon (cough*Rhyperior*cough*Colonel_M*cough) might move to OU in the middle of the test, which is something I would like to avoid. Perhaps we wait to start this test till after the January OU list comes out? or am I worrying over nothing?

Facebook Manager

The problem with that is, that would leave us 2 weeks in the first part of the test, and removing that one pokemon might produce a very different metagame than the one before it was OU. As much as I want to get this test started, i feel it would be better for the test to wait till after the January OU list comes out.

Facebook Manager

Because when people vote on the pokes that they deem to be BL, they will be dealing with a metagame that is different from the one that had been testing for 4 weeks. The whole point of making the first test 6 weeks was so people would have a long deal of time to base it off of. By allowing one pokemon to leave in the middle, we are negating the whole reason the first part of the test is 6 weeks long.

OU and IRC Leader

Yea I was just wondering how adamant you were about altered metagames. We already have precedence for deciding whether or not to test suspects in a changed metagame, so I was looking for how specific you wanted to be.